An Extended Trochanteric Osteotomy Is Necessary for the Removal of Broken Modular Metaphyseal Engaging Femoral Stems.

BACKGROUND: Modular metaphyseal engaging (MME) femoral components in total hip arthroplasty (THA) allow optimized femoral length, offset, and anteversion and are useful in patients with unusual proximal femoral anatomy. Fretting, corrosion, and stem fractures above the modular sleeve are complications associated with these implants. The purpose of this study was to identify failure mechanisms of retrieved MME femoral components at our institution, identify all broken stem cases, and evaluate how often an extended trochanteric osteotomy (ETO) was required for removal. METHODS: All consecutively retrieved MME femoral components from September 2002 to May 2023 were reviewed. Patient demographics, procedure information, component specifications, indications for removal, and requirements for further revision surgery were reviewed. Descriptive statistics were calculated for variables of interest. RESULTS: There were 131 retrieved MME components. The mean age at surgery was 59 years (range, 28 to 75), 49% were women, mean body mass index was 29.4 (range, 20.7 to 33.3), and mean American Society of Anesthesiologists score was 2.4 ± 0.5. There were 102 (78%) stems of 1 design (stem A), and 29 (22%) stems of a different design (stem B). Of 131 components, 10 (7.6%) failed secondary to stem fracture proximal to the modular sleeve. Four of 102 (4%) of stem A and 6 of 29 (21% of stem B) fractured. All broken stems required additional intervention for removal during revision THA, using an ETO (N = 9) or cortical window (N = 1) in which an intraoperative proximal femoral fracture occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Broken MME stems present a challenge for orthopaedic surgeons during revision THA. When a stem fracture occurs above the ingrown sleeve, the distal splines may have osseous interdigitation into the clothespin. Thus, when revising a broken MME stem, an ETO should be performed, and the segment should be long enough to allow distal access.

Clinical and Biomechanical Evaluation of Mid-Level Constrained and Posterior-Stabilized Polyethylene Inserts in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: An Analysis of 12,674 Cases.

BACKGROUND: Mid-level constraint polyethylene designs provide additional stability in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purposes of this study were to (1) compare the survivorship and reason for revision between mid-level inserts and posterior-stabilized (PS) used in primary TKA and (2) evaluate the biomechanical constraint characteristics of mid-level inserts. METHODS: We reviewed all cases of primary TKA performed at our institution from 2016 to 2019 using either PS or mid-level constrained inserts from 1 of 6 manufacturers. Data elements included patient demographics, implants, reasons for revision, and whether a manipulation under anesthesia was performed. We performed finite element analyses to quantify the varus/valgus and axial-rotation constraint of each mid-level constrained insert. A one-to-one propensity score matching was conducted between the patients with mid-level and PS inserts to match for variables, which yielded 2 cohorts of 3,479 patients. RESULTS: For 9,163 PS and 3,511 mid-level TKAs, survivorship free from all-cause revision was estimated up to 5 years and was lower for mid-level than PS inserts (92.7 versus 94.1%, respectively, P = .004). When comparing each company's mid-level insert to the same manufacturer's PS insert, we found no differences in all-cause revision rates (P ≥ .91) or revisions for mechanical problems (P ≥ .97). Using propensity score matching between mid-level and PS groups, no significant differences were found in rates of manipulation under anesthesia (P = .72), all-cause revision (P = .12), revision for aseptic loosening (P = .07), and revision for instability (P = .45). Finite element modeling demonstrated a range in varus/valgus constraint from ±1.1 to >5°, and a range in axial-rotation constraint from ±1.5 to ±11.5° among mid-level inserts. CONCLUSIONS: Despite wide biomechanical variations in varus/valgus and axial-rotation constraint, we found minimal differences in early survivorship rates between PS and mid-level constrained knees.

Sickle cell trait and multisystem trauma: an unaddressed urgent knowledge gap.

Sickle cell trait (SCT) has historically been considered a benign condition, but SCT-positive patients have increased baseline risk of venous thromboembolism and chronic kidney disease, as well as increased risk of sickled erythrocytes in settings of hypoxia, acidosis, and hypovolemia. Multisystem traumatic injuries are a common clinical scenario, in which hypoxia, acidosis, and hypovolemia occur; however, little is known about how SCT-positive status impacts outcomes in multisystem trauma. We conducted a scoping literature review to investigate what was known about SCT in the setting of multisystem trauma. In the 110+ years that sickle cell hemoglobinopathies have been known, only three studies have ever examined the relationship between SCT and multisystem traumas. All three articles were case reports. None of the articles intentionally measured the association between SCT and multisystem trauma outcomes; they only incidentally captured information on SCT. Our article then examines historical reasons why so little research has studied the pathophysiology of the multisystem trauma in patients with SCT. Among the reasons is that historical and logistical factors have long prevented patients from knowing their SCT-status: historical discriminations against SCT-positive patients in the 1960s and 1970s delayed federal mandating of SCT newborn screening until 2006, whereas difficulties communicating known SCT-status to afflicted children also contributed to lack of patient knowledge. In light of our findings, we offer specific calls to action for the trauma surgery research community: (1) consider testing for SCT in trauma patients that have unexpected complications, particularly venous thromboembolism, rhabdomyolysis, or renal failure and (2) support research to understand how SCT impacts multisystem trauma outcomes. We also offer specific guidelines about how to 'proceed with caution' in implementation of these goals in light of the troubled history of SCT testing and policy in the USA.